ArticleActa neurochirurgica2025
Image quality assessment in spine surgery: a comparison of intraoperative CBCT and postoperative MDCT.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical Feasibility Studies and Potential Applications of Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Integrated in Multimodality X-Ray System for Small Animals.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate if intraoperative cone-beam CT (CBCT) provides equivalent image quality to postoperative multidetector CT (MDCT) in spine surgery, potentially eliminating unnecessary imaging and cumulative radiation exposure.
methodsTwenty-seven patients (16 men, 11 women; median age 39 years) treated with spinal fixation surgery were evaluated using intraoperative CBCT and postoperative MDCT. The images were independently evaluated by four neuroradiologists, utilizing a five-step Likert scale and visual grading characteristics (VGC) analysis. The area under the VGC curve (AUC
resultsIn image quality, CBCT was the preferred modality in thoracolumbar spine (AUC
conclusionIn spine surgery, CBCT provides superior image quality for thoracolumbar imaging, while MDCT performs better for cervical imaging. Intraoperative CBCT could potentially replace postoperative MDCT in thoracolumbar spine procedures, while postoperative MDCT remains essential for cervical spine assessment. KEY POINTS: Subjective assessment demonstrated that CBCT was the preferred modality for thoracolumbar spine imaging, while MDCT was favored for cervical spine imaging. Agreement between readers was good, while individual readings showed moderate consistency in repeated assessments. Objective assessment of image clarity and detail showed both modalities performed equally well in the thoracolumbar spine, while MDCT performed better in the cervical spine. Intraoperative CBCT proves superior to postoperative MDCT for thoracolumbar spine imaging, potentially eliminating redundant scans, and improving workflow. Postoperative MDCT remains essential for cervical spine procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.